Kinder Morgan Successfully Completes Tests of Ethanol Transport in Pipeline: To Offer the Service by Mid-November
19 October 2008
 |
| A pig train will prepare the pipeline for ethanol transport. Click to enlarge. Source: KMP |
Kinder Morgan Energy Partners (KMP), the largest independent owner/operator of refined products pipelines in the US, recently successfully completed a series of tests to demonstrate the commercial feasibility of transporting batched denatured ethanol is the 195-mile, 16-inch gasoline pipeline between Tampa and Orlando, Florida. The pipeline is one of its Central Florida Pipeline Company’s assets.
KMP is finalizing mechanical modifications to the pipeline to support ethanol transportation, and intends to offer this service to its customers by mid-November. The company has also completed modifications to tanks, truck racks and related infrastructure for new or expanded ethanol service at various terminals in the Southeast and Pacific Northwest. KMP said that it has invested approximately $60 million in these ethanol-related projects.
Earlier experiments with transporting ethanol in conventional mixed product pipelines have shown several problems, from difficulty in maintaining the quality of the fuel to facility material failures due primarily to stress corrosion cracking (SCC), according to the Association of Oil Pipelines (AOPL). Currently, ethanol is transported from production facilities via barge, railcar or truck to fuel terminals for blending with gasoline; The blend is then delivered by truck. However, the least expensive distribution option for ethanol would be by pipeline.
To prepare its gasoline pipeline to accommodate ethanol, KMP replaced components in stages during periodic shutdown, including meter prover seals, pump main seals, and flexatalic spiral wound stainless gaskets. Pump impeller metallurgy, main line block valves, and O-rings in most instruments are ethanol compatible.
Among other applications, pigs (pipeline inspection gauges) are used to clean debris from pipelines, either purely mechanically (e.g., using attached brushes or scrapers), or in combination with chemicals.
To clean and prepare the pipeline for ethanol transport, KMP uses a cleaning pig train propelled by a typical gasoline batch. The final stage of the cleaning train contains inhibitor to precondition the steel. Cleaning chemicals and waster are captured at Orlando and disposed of at an approved site.
Resources
Biofuels Infrastructure Development (KMP, August 2008)
Enhanced Pipeline Cleaning using Combined Mechanical and Chemical Techniques
Safe & Reliable Ethanol Transportation & Storage Technology Roadmapping Workshop, Summary Results (November 2007)
Good News.
Ethanol is expensive than Gasolene in energy terms, since its transported in Trucks while Gasolene is transported thru pipelines.
Now Ethanol will also become cheap enough.
Posted by: Max Reid | 19 October 2008 at 09:57 AM
Finally. We are building the alternative liquid fuel infrastructure. With this expansion of distribution capability - one more impediment to E85 pumps is removed.
Of course if it wasn't for Bush we would have a lot more than the 50, E85 pumps we started with in 2001.
Bush broke it. McBama will fix it.
Posted by: sulleny | 19 October 2008 at 10:54 AM
Gas stations in the Corn Belt should be allowed to sell E20 as regular gas. Sure it will shorten the life a little bit of a few older vehicles in the Corn Belt but it is a small price to pay for a much more efficient distribution system for ethanol. In Brazil it is law that all gasoline sold contains minimum 25% (as of July 2007) and that works fine for them. Today ethanol in the US is probably 20 cents more expensive per gallon of pure ethanol than it could be simply because it has to be transported at long distances in order to satisfy the strict blending regulations saying max 5% in regular gasoline. This is an enormous waste of money. Annual production capacity is now about 11 billion gallons of ethanol per year so this federal regulation cost ethanol consumers about 2.2 billion USD per year. However, not all ethanol is transported at long distance so say the annual cost is about 1 billion currently and increasing because the ethanol production increases every year. The 20 cents per gallon is a rough estimate from my side. If you think I am wrong please speak out.
Still my point is that this is a problem that can be solved by changing the law.
PS sulleny
McCain says he will remove the ethanol subsidy and that will kill the entire US ethanol industry overnight because it is operating at break even and has been doing so for about a year. However, Obama will continue to support the ethanol industry and by now he is almost the next president so Bush’s ethanol program will continue and it will secure jobs and national security in a most peaceful manner.
Posted by: Henrik | 19 October 2008 at 11:16 AM
Corn ethanol is a horrible thing to produce from farmland. I don't view farmland fertile topsoil as an infinite resource.
I'm all for reducing imported foreign oil to zero asap, but I'm not for corn Ethanol.
Posted by: TM | 19 October 2008 at 09:11 PM
@Henrik:
Yes McCain would eliminate the $200M Market Access Program run by the U.S. Agriculture Department that shares the cost to promote U.S. agriculture exports overseas.
He also said he would eliminate the 54-cent-per-gallon tariff on ethanol imports that Congress extended this year until 2010. The tariff has limited U.S. ethanol imports from countries with extensive biofuel programs such as Brazil, which produces 27.5 billion liters of ethanol annually.
It seems reasonable that very soon U.S. farmers should compete with foreign ethanol on an equal footing. If anything it will drive the expansion of cellulosic at a faster pace.
Posted by: sulleny | 20 October 2008 at 02:44 PM
"Corn ethanol is a horrible thing to produce from farmland. I don't view farmland fertile topsoil as an infinite resource."
Thus you think people shouldn't eat meat either? Because that's where the ethanol comes from, waste starch. Ethanol doesn't compete with food or increase the use of agricultural inputs. ALL of the corn starch used for ethanol is WASTED as manure. Manure contains more fermentable sugar than suagr beets for Christ's sake. Get your facts straight hippies before you spread more untrue memes.
And ethanol should either be transported as WHOLE CORN into major metropolitan areas where the various corn fractions can be input into value-added processes, or used in the corn producing regions to replace petroleum imports.
Why export ethanol (other than for fuel additives) from Iowa when the state can burn the whole producttion output? Make it a law that all government vehicles 1) use ethanol and b) only use cheap ethanol e.g. not the oil company E-85 crap. Oil companies buy (read: bid up prices) 99% of all industrial fuel ethanol, even though they have NO legal requirement to do so) so you can blame them for the high E-85 prices as well.
Posted by: John Galt | 20 October 2008 at 10:06 PM
"McCain says he will remove the ethanol subsidy and that will kill the entire US ethanol industry overnight because it is operating at break even and has been doing so for about a year."
Subsidy reduces economic fitness. Subsidy attracts capital to unfit enterprises at the expense of more fit enterprises. The best thing to happen to ethanol fuel would be to replace the subsidies with a flat Btu-corrected road tax. Even better would be to remove all taxes on in-state production of ethanol as envisioned by the original U.S. Constitution.
Posted by: John Galt | 20 October 2008 at 10:37 PM
Sulleny and John
In principle I am also against subsidizing any industry for the same reason that you are against it. We should not keep inefficient industries alive. The problem is that in the real world it is not easy to see which industries that are the most efficient because of what economists calls positive and negative externalities. Fossil gasoline has a huge unpaid negative externality called import security that is paid by the US Army that spend about 180 billion abroad to keep about 180 billion gallons of fuel flowing to the US that about $1 per gallon. My point is that US tax payers are better off if they subsidize homegrown ethanol with 54 cents a gallon than fossil imported fuel with $1 gallon.
I am not too optimistic about the emergence of cellulosic ethanol. The first commercial scale refineries will first be running in 2011. A 100 million gallon per year facility is expected to cost about $600 million to build compared to only $200 million for a similar corn ethanol refinery. 600 million is a lot for a 100 million gallon facility. It will take about 12 years to write it off and pay interest if you spend 75 cents per gallon just for capital expenses. All the stories about $1 a gallon ethanol from 2nd generation ethanol is only considering the cost of biomass not capital expenses, profit margins and other costs. So forget about $1. It will cost minimum $2 per gallon of 2nd generation ethanol.
Currently it is impossible to find people that will finance the large scale 2nd generation facilities. The ones that go online in 2011 will be heavily subsidized with government money about 50% of capital costs. So I am not optimistic on behalf of the cellulosic ethanol industry unless the oil price starts to go sky high again. $150 - $200 per barrel will do the trick.
Posted by: Henrik | 21 October 2008 at 12:38 AM
There are dozens of conversion and cellulosic projects under way. Many with no government funds at all. See the Cobalt Biofuels announce. Liquid biofuels are a necessity to transition from fossil to electrification. Someone has to make them. There's huge profit there. Only the oil companies and their affiliates want you to think that making ethanol (process that's been around for some 3500 years) is difficult and expensive. As noted they currently buy most of the corn ethanol for markup.
While $2.00 ethanol is pricier - it still beats $3.50 gas that is not dropping much.
http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/cellulosic-firms-match-coskatas-ethanol-claims-725.html
Posted by: sulleny | 21 October 2008 at 01:49 AM
Sulleny
The $2 for cellulosic ethanol is out of refinery prices. It will be about 70 cents more expensive at the gas station. This link will give you the current out of refinery prices for ethanol and gasoline. Then you can compare with what you see at your local gas station. It is about 70 cents higher.
http://www.ethanolstatistics.com/Commodity_Prices/US_Ethanol_and_Commodity_Prices.aspx
Note that corn ethanol is currently selling for $1.78 a gallon out of refinery price less than the $2 dollar needed for cellulosic ethanol.
Corn ethanol has been running at break even since September 2007. This can be seen from this webpage.
http://www.card.iastate.edu/research/bio/tools/hist_eth_gm.aspx
Consequently there has not been commenced any important new ethanol projects since September 2007. All the increase in ethanol production in 2008 is coming from projects decided on prior to September 2007. For new projects to be announced oil must go up and / or corn most go down.
Eventually oil will be back to $150 or more per barrel because of peak oil and because the current recession in USA, Japan and EU is a temporary phenomenon. It will be over by 2010 or 2011.
Posted by: | 21 October 2008 at 03:09 AM
me above
Posted by: Henrik | 21 October 2008 at 03:09 AM